> at least 11 of them informed the human resources department or their managers about what they said was racist or discriminatory treatment ... One Black employee said her manager suggested in front of colleagues that she was dealing drugs and carrying a gun, trading on racist stereotypes.
In an era of smartphones and viral videos, the fact that we don't have a single audio/video recording exposing the racism seems rather suspect. I'm not saying that is proof of anything. But something to consider.
The idea that coinbase, a silicon valley/SF/etc company, would discriminate, especially against black people, is hard for me to believe. But I'm open to anything. Certainly even if the company doesn't have a culture of bias, it may have a few bad apples.
> If the numbers haven’t changed, it’s definitely because there wasn’t a real intention to do so
This is a lie. Everyone who works in tech knows that companies are bending over backwards to hire black employees. The problem is the lack of qualified employees. Even unqualified black employees are being hired just to say "we have more black employees today than last year". It's been like this for a few years now. That tech companies had no real intention to hire black employees is simply a lie.
> When Mr. Armstrong wrote his blog post in September asking employees to leave their outside interests at the door, he was celebrated and praised by several tech investors.
So this is why we have a nytimes article. It's a political attack masquerading as a employment bias issue. Got it.
> In an era of smartphones and viral videos, the fact that we don't have a single audio/video recording exposing the racism seems rather suspect. I'm not saying that is proof of anything. But something to consider.
Do you regularly record interactions with your coworkers, on the chance they may say something incriminating? I don't, and I expect most would not try to record things at work unless they go into a meeting expecting it to end poorly.
> The problem is the lack of qualified employees.
This sounds awfully similar to the argument made against women: qualified women just don't apply! Unfortunately, that is not actually true. http://isitapipelineproblem.com/
You seem to accept Coinbase/Brian Armstrong's words without question. Why do you feel that the Black employees' words must be critiqued to hell and back?
> Do you regularly record interactions with your coworkers, on the chance they may say something incriminating?
That's a silly response and you know it. If there was systematic racism, as the article seems to be implying, then yes, I would record it. I would record it even if it wasn't directed at me but someone else. If more than 50% of the black employees are leaving due to "racism" then of course I would record it. Wouldn't you? If a manager was being racist towards your co-worker, wouldn't you record it? Or are you a racist?
> This sounds awfully similar to the argument made against women: qualified women just don't apply!
No. I'm saying there is not a lot of black students getting CS degrees/etc. Hence the lack of qualified employees. It's a supply problem, not a demand problem.
> You seem to accept Coinbase/Brian Armstrong's words without question.
No. I specifically said I didn't in the comment you replied to. I said I am open to the idea of racism but I find it very unlikely.
> Why do you feel that the Black employees' words must be critiqued to hell and back?
The difference between you and me is that I just want the truth and you want to push an agenda. I think everyone's words should be critiqued "to hell and back". Including the ceo, black employees and most definitely the political activists at the nytimes. How else are you going to get to the truth?
In an era of smartphones and viral videos, the fact that we don't have a single audio/video recording exposing the racism seems rather suspect. I'm not saying that is proof of anything. But something to consider.
The idea that coinbase, a silicon valley/SF/etc company, would discriminate, especially against black people, is hard for me to believe. But I'm open to anything. Certainly even if the company doesn't have a culture of bias, it may have a few bad apples.
> If the numbers haven’t changed, it’s definitely because there wasn’t a real intention to do so
This is a lie. Everyone who works in tech knows that companies are bending over backwards to hire black employees. The problem is the lack of qualified employees. Even unqualified black employees are being hired just to say "we have more black employees today than last year". It's been like this for a few years now. That tech companies had no real intention to hire black employees is simply a lie.
> When Mr. Armstrong wrote his blog post in September asking employees to leave their outside interests at the door, he was celebrated and praised by several tech investors.
So this is why we have a nytimes article. It's a political attack masquerading as a employment bias issue. Got it.